![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.raleighpublicrecord.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/02\/Wake-Commission-packed-room-022012-300x225.jpg\" "\\"wake")
<\/a>A packed house at the Wake County Commission meeting Monday.<\/p><\/div>\n
Republicans Paul Coble, Phil Matthews, Joe Bryan and Tony Gurley voted in favor of the endorsement, while Democrats James West, Erv Portman and Betty Lou Ward voted against it.<\/p>\n
The resolution was put on the agenda by Coble, Commission chair and Republican candidate for the 13th district congressional seat now held by Democrat Brad Miller.<\/p>\n
Coble’s resolution also encouraged voters to express their opinion on the amendment, which will be on the May 8 ballot, but opponents of the amendment said the resolution encouraged residents to vote for it.<\/p>\n
While North Carolina already has a law on the books banning gay marriage, the referendum would make it part of the state’s constitution.<\/p>\n
The vote came after more than 20 people encouraged commission members to vote against Coble’s resolution during an hour-long public comment period.<\/p>\n
\u201cMy marriage doesn’t need defense,\u201d said John Burns. \u201cI’m offended that people think I have the right to vote on whether people should get married.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mathew Mirarchi, a 27-year-old anthropologist, told commissioners that he has a master degree, pays his taxes and pumps thousands of dollars into the economy.<\/p>\n
\u201cAll of those qualities and contributions are nullified when I tell you that I’m a proud gay man,\u201d he said, asking the commission to allow him to share the same rights they have.<\/p>\n
Speakers said that if commissioners supported the amendment it would drive business and new residents away from Wake County and would also send a message that the county’s gay residents are second-class citizens.<\/p>\n
The only audience member that spoke in support of the resolution was Tami Fitzgerald from Vote for Marriage NC<\/a>, a group that is campaigning in support of the amendment.<\/p>\n Fitzgerald said that the amendment would not harm economic growth, effect health insurance coverage or unmarried straight couples like opponents of the amendment claim.<\/p>\n She went on to say that without a marriage amendment, the definition of marriage can be changed at any time and that the current definition \u2014 marriage between a man and a woman \u2014 needs protecting.<\/p>\n